Those who read this will see that every single contentious matter (timing, whether the result is binding, rules on broadcasting and advertising spending, and on the distribution of factional manifestoes to voters, freedom of front benches to campaign etc etc etc) has been left to be defined at the time, bad in any case, but even worse when the time will never come. Who is fooled by this stuff?

A e-mail allegedly from David Cameron, sent out by Tory headquarters to journalists including me (For my own amusement I have added some emphases) :

‘In January, I set out our party’s position on Europe. I made clear that the EU needed fundamental, far reaching change - and that Britain would lead the way in negotiating that reform.

I also promised an In-Out referendum once those negotiations were complete, and at any event by the end of 2017. That's the right time to have a vote - it is wrong to ask people whether to stay or go before we have had a chance to put the relationship right.

But make no mistake - my commitment to a referendum is absolute. If I am Prime Minister after the next election, there will be an In-Out referendum. No ifs, no buts. And before the 2015 election, we will do everything we can to make it the law.

That’s why today the Conservative Party is publishing a draft bill that would legislate for a referendum by the end of 2017. We understand that we are in a Coalition government - but we are going to examine every opportunity to bring it before Parliament and try to get it on the statute book.

For too long the British people have had no say about their future in Europe. I am absolutely determined to put that right. Our action today is further proof we’re serious.’

It does make me laugh that even as he pledges no ifs and no buts, the Prime Minister inserts the biggest if he can find in the shops, ‘If I am Prime Minister after the next election’ . And he begins with a ‘but’ the absurd idea that a minority party can get its own Referendum Bill on to the statute book.

And a recent ICM poll, published by the Guardian (but, oddly enough, not picked up much by other media, which I feel it should have been, given its very striking data), showing the Tories at 28%, an extraordinarily low level of support at this stage in a parliament for a party which carries on as if it is the next government.

This was the lowest Tory share since 2002, when Iain Duncan Smith was leader, and also a record showing for ‘other’ parties of 27%, almost equalling the Tory total. This distressingly includes 4% from the BNP, a surge which can please no civilised person .

..aright, the raw data are even more striking. Out of 1001 people polled, 104 said they would not vote, 222 said they didn’t know how they would vote, and 102 refused to say. Thus, 42% of those polled expressed no party preference.

The none-of-the-above party which before 2010 tended to be around 36%, has plainly grown quite sharply, to 42%. How long before it has the majority? . The UKIP vote seems to me to be mainly Tory defectors and predominantly older people, but with a significant number of Labour dissidents now joining in. I suspect Labour would do worse, but for a flow of deserters from the Liberal Democrats back into their old Labour-voting habits.

Tory support is weakest among the 18-24 age-group, at a pitiful 9%, though interestingly it is no better among the old (17%) than it is in the 35-64 age range. I had always assumed that Tory strength was concentrated in the over-70s. Maybe they have broken with the Tories in larger numbers than other age groups. UKIP is significantly stronger in the 65+ age group.

Now, to revisit days, weeks , months and years gone by – my article of October 2007. I said then that we had a unique opportunity to remake British politics. The chances are not quite so clear-cut now, as the Try Party cannot be despatched to its reward with a single blow, as I think could have happened had it been treated as it so richly deserves back in May 2010.

The principal difficulty we have now with habitual Tories is that they have fooled themselves into thinking that their party did in fact win the 2015 election, when it didn’t.

This explains their frequent empurpled rage when their desires are frustrated, on the grounds that the Tories are in Coalition with the Liberal Democrats. Of course, anyone who understands the Tory party knows that these desires , on the EU, on immigration, on crime and punishment and on education, etc, etc, would be frustrated anyway. The Tory party doesn’t actually need the Liberal Democrats to help it take the wrong view on all these subjects. It takes it anyway. How could it be otherwise, when its chief brains are David Willetts, Oliver Letwin and the Right Honourable the Lord (Michael) Heseltine, Companion of Honour?

So we have a double delusion here. One, that the Tories can still win an election, and have done so, when they can’t, and haven’t. Two, that the feebleness of Tory policies is attributable to the wicked Liberal Democrats, rather than to the Tory party’s own conscious and deliberate choices of policies and leaders.

Thus the argument can still seriously be advanced that votes for UKIP might prevent a Tory victory at the next election. You cannot prevent something that isn’t going to happen, and can’t happen. Thus voting for UKIP will have no effect at all on the Tory prospects of forming a majority government. But millions still believe that it might, and may be restrained from taking a perfectly reasonable step, when 2015 comes, by this absurd fantasy.

Next, the fantasy can be maintained that, if there *were* such a Tory majority government under David Cameron, it would be significantly different from the Coalition. It wouldn’t be. It might even be worse, given the grave shortage of talent and intelligence among Tory MPs. It just wouldn’t have so many excuses. But since it couldn’t exist, that’s of no interest.

Thus, the people who have it in their power to demolish the Tory Party and clear the way for real change are heavily restrained by commonly believed falsehoods, which cloud their minds and restrict their willingness to act decisively in their own interest.

Even so, UKIP's success has attracted success, and will attract more success before it begins to falter in the year before the general election. And, as I have mentioned before, the frenzied personal attack on Gordon Brown, which shored up the sagging Tory vote in 2010, cannot be repeated. Much of the loathing then directed at Mr Brown is beginning to turn towards Mr Cameron himself, who is increasingly seen to have portrayed himself as something he was not. Without the Gordon Brown weapon, the Tories will struggle to keep the seats they have, especially since Labour is now aware of the damage which mass immigration has done to its cause and , while it won’t undo the damage, it is prepared to fight dirty on that topic if needs be. Gillian Duffy (referred to by Mr Brown as a ’bigoted woman’ after he met her on his campaign trail, because of her perfectly reasonable views on immigration and welfare benefits) will be wooed, not insulted, in the next Labour campaign. They’re already working on it.

I would like to reproduce here what I wrote in 2007:

‘Even if the Tories could win an election (I speculate on this unlikely event at greater length because so many people now seem to believe that this is the case), what would that mean? I predict a government very similar to that of John Major, only even more torn by its unhealable division over the EU. People forget now, but Major's government was one of political correctness, weakness on crime, failure on education, high taxes and conflict over the EU.

‘It is claimed that the Tories are now more anti-EU. In truth, this is not really the case. Many Tories have shifted from passive acceptance of the EU to what is called 'Euroscepticism', an unrealistic belief that, while the EU is bad for Britain, it is possible for us to negotiate ourselves a safe corner within it, which does not threaten our independence and laws, or the control of our borders. This 'in Europe but not run by Europe' view simply doesn't stand up to practical politics. The EU demands of its members a constant and accelerating surrender of national independence. If you win a small battle, you will rapidly find that the EU tries another attack from a different direction to achieve the same end. Don't like the Euro? How about a constitution? The end result, the whittling away of sovereignty, is the same. Why shouldn't it be? Ever-closer union is the EU's stated purpose.

In practice, those who are honestly in favour of EU membership and all that it entails, or honestly against it (the only two honourable positions in this debate) still cannot possibly agree - and it cannot be long, in the nature of the EU, before any government is confronted with the choice of continued reduction of national independence, or departure. There is no doubt which option Mr Cameron would choose.’

In what way was I wrong? Taxes are in fact rising, though it has been uncontroversial because the opposition would have raised them just as fast. It has been done largely by stealth methods the extension of the ‘higher rate’ to modest earners, the increasing load on council tax, the savings tax through ‘inflation’, which reduces the government debt while shrivelling our savings, and of course the huge green taxes, levied through household bills, funding the mad dash for wind power.

I’d also like to reproduce (in full, as, though I was righter than any other prophet, I was not perfectly right) my predictions for the last election, made two and a half years before it took place:

‘The result of the next election is already decided - the Left will be in office, either with a Labour majority, or a Lib-Lab pact, or a Lib-Con pact, or a Tory government in thrall to left-wing ideas. No radical change, on the areas which Tory voters care about most, will take place.

But it is far more likely that it will be either a Labour government or a Lab-Lib pact.’

I wish, in retrospect, that I had left out the most far-fetched of those options, a Tory government in thrall to left-wing ideas. It wasn’t really possible then (not that such a thing would have been desirable from any rational point of view) , and is even less possible now. What remains wholly unthinkable is a conservative Tory government, a contradiction in terms.

The last line, actually, is now a better prediction for 2015. I can’t presently see much likelihood of a Labour majority, but it’s not wholly impossible, especially if the Coalition stays together and the Lib Dems are dragged beneath the waves by the suction, as the Tory Titanic gurgles and bubbles towards the ocean bed, with Dan Hannan at the prow and Ken Clarke at the stern.

mikebarnes.How those superior types,like to sneer at the BNP.They like to think that those BNP members are stupid and ignorant,we all know that this is not true,ok many of them may never have been to university but most in the party know all about the grim reality of life in inner city Britain.we should keep reminding ourselves that those wealthy liberals who support Conservative and Labour love this immigration because of the cheap labour that it brings,they bang on about how wonderful multi cultural Britain is but what they are really saying is how wonderful the £6 per hour Filipina nanny is or how great it is that they can find that Romanian cleaner who will clean that big house for £30 cash in the hand.

I have to agree with you there re Yarmouth. I'm from Norfolk myself. I last visited Yarmouth in 2000 and it seemed run down then. It seems to suffer the same problems as a lot of coastal towns - full of the kind of people who look old before their time or look as though they've been on Jeremy Kyle. Some coastal towns in the south east have done quite well, like Whitstable (which is more a village of 35,000) and of course Brighton which is London's beach exclave. Some of seaside towns have reinvented themselves as arts destination, largely through better transport links to London and some dedicated locals. But the truth is, why go to rainy Rhyl when you can go to sunny Marbella.

@ Rick Allen .
Nicely put sir. But I fear you will soon be under attack. by the usual suspects. We all saw what happened last election. The BNP and UKIP were wiped out , sensible or otherwise. The Melons ( the Geens , on the outside.red inside ) managed to all move to Brighton.
So any chance of the BNP suceeding in the recent climate, of voting out the incumbent only to see a clone re-elected is not gonna happen. But your trueism that the BNP membership are sensible folk on the whole, the likes of Hitchens and his ilk cannot accept. But then mostly the BNP support, is the poor living cheek by jowel to this immigrant nightmare. No supprises there what.

Firstly, congratulations to Peter Hitchens for moving on from the Dylan punning headlines to Paul Simon.

The Tories under Cameroon are indeed destined to lose, but Labour don't look like winners. The ICM poll suggests the Labour vote may be soft: about 55% of their supporters are definite voters compared with c65% of Tories and UKIP.

Thankfully, I am in the enviable position of not needing to belong to a union, as I work on a freelance basis.
Since buying our own van, I & my team of friends bargain on our own behalf with potential employers, offering a good rate & superb results for a minimalist package which we feel compensates us ( aside from our wages) for any discomfort caused. If we don't get what we want, then we move on, as we routinely have to turn down jobs that are too big or would take too long anyway.

Please forgive these ramblings, as they have a point - in the future, if Unions are going to continue to attempt to be hyper-political, then rational Socialists are going to have to call for their disbandment
because a union beholden to a political party ( which are funded by all sorts of nefarious characters ) is more likely to do it's members more harm than good.

At this stage, we need to know how to disengage the [ Communist ] Manifesto side of our brain, and engage the Keynesian business side, fighting for our rights in a quid pro quo sense. Presently if business want cheap labour, they will get it, so it's up to each individual member of the labour force to be self motivated and aware how uniquely important they are.
When the labour cannot rely on anybody but themselves to ensure they are fairly recompensed for their essential skills, only laziness allows them to be persuaded otherwise.

Immigration remains above my pay grade, but it would seem obvious that calling a ten to fifteen year hiatus on the majority of non-EU immigration would be a rational step. People can argue for that, though no party or union is likely to.

Peter Hitchens is quite wrong about the BNP.The liberal media has for a long time now brainwashed the British people about this sensible party.The BNP are the only party who will seriously tackle crime,end immigration and create a fair economy,The working classes,whether they are black,white or Asian should vote BNP.CON DEM LAB and the British media are a danger to this Island.

Regarding Great Yarmouth, I agree that St Nicholas is a fine church - quite peaceful for one so near a town centre - but I must disagree with the remainder of your post describing the town & would advise our host - & anyone else of sound mind - to give it a wide berth.

Having lived & worked there (my son lives there unfortunately) I can only describe it as a dump! Populated, it seems to me, by fat, unemployed, illiterate layabouts scoffing their faces with chips from one of the town centre's numerous chip stalls & chain-smoking endless amounts of roll-ups.

Never a day went by without a police car tearing down the 'middle' road, sirens & lights blazing, towards the Barrack estate in the south end of town.

As for the public houses, you'd get a warmer welcome in the south pole rather than try any pub away from the town centre. I found the people - for the most part - secular & cliquey.

Like so many other seaside towns (and there's quite a number of them here on the south coast around Southhampton, Portsmouth & the Isle of Wight) it is dying. Relient on a swiftly disappearing tourist trade & as you say, financed by an ever decreasing North Sea oil industry.

It may once have deserved its 'Great' title, but now, no. Not in my opinion.

...for those who may have read my previous post - for the purpose of avoidance of any doubt - I love Scotland, apart that is, from the over abundance of Labour MP's - and any reference to Brave Heart (which for all I know may be beatpoets favouite film) is purely coincidental.

The ‘Mr Farage goes to Scotland’ episode is interesting. As others have suggested, the daggers are now drawn for UKIP, and the party is being conveniently and casually lumped in with the BNP - and collectively both now appear to have been placed - by our political enemies - in the same ("scum") club.

Recently, on BBC/QT, one curiously outraged twenty-something audience member described the UKIP panel member as belonging to a ‘vile party’. Really? I vote UKIP and can personally attest for my perfectly reputable and non-offensive beliefs, but then I guess I would think that. However, things are getting a little to tribal; Ok we are in Scotland, so ‘brave-heart’ and all that - though I do hope a line is drawn before things get serious, a la offal eating Syrian rebel soldier. I mention the BBC/QT audience member’s age because those Scottish demonstrators also seemed a similarly strange bunch, young - yes, but also bursting into laughter after Farrage had been driven away whilst checking their camera phones, so perhaps not the most serious of politicos; oh, and one lady appeared to be in a wheelchair - must have been the equal opps. ‘virtuosity’ officer.

@ Ronnie james
Thank you fot that reply ,It was instructive if not a little pessimistic . As your neo Marxism is against the current crop of employers .Should you not also be protesting your union. For they have the heads so far up the current crops behind. And recruiting immigrants in jobs our own folk cannot get. Then perhaps life might get a tad less frustrating for us mere plebs.

Tolerance is a strong part of our greedy culture. One cannot indulge fully in the joys of consumerism whilst whining about other people - else ones own shameful proclivities are liable to be aired.

That's in a consumer society, concentrated on achieving success in vocation or business & joy in family life - not survival.

Should hyper-inflation wreck these desired social norms, making them far less important than eating & heating, or paying rent, people from all walks of life will become increasingly less tolerant to perceived breaches of their rights.

Malleable politicos will adjust to these changes as required.

This could mean a total collapse of the three main parties whose constitutions would become obsolete.
Whilst the BNP could do well in this scenario, it seems unlikely, as there will be so much political upheaval, they are unlikely to fall into the mire & come out with a salmon.

So, whilst intolerant politics maybe a strong possibility in Britain's future, the money may not see a specific requirement in backing the BNP, as far more assiduous political minds would be available with similar manifestos.

Mr Owen.

Disgraceful behaviour by narrow minded nationalists has always put me off the Welsh independence cause, whilst being the son of a Glaswegian ( with family in Edinburgh, too ) made me cringe with embarrassment at Mr Farage's heckling last night.

Frankly, the media can carry on spitting on the forest fire of discontent with their 'racist' dribble, but it doesn't seem to be doing them much good.

People are slowly caring less & less about being smeared with the racist tag.
British Asians are getting as racist as the rest of us too, if recent reports on the television are to be believed, as several market stall holders in Solihull were remonstrating at our lame border controls.

My brand of Trotskyite- Neo Marxism pertains mainly to the relationship twixt employer & employee, so the Far Left can all take a long walk of a short pier as far as I'm concerned. They are an acute embarrassment & their 'politics' has far more to do with consolidating an identity narrative than functioning, pragmatic solutions that will help us fight our way out of the impending doom.

Thankfully, their skills & organisation, much like their arguments, come up severely wanting, so whilst I agree with you that they may fascistically attempt to disrupt future UKIP meetings ( to impose the only freedom of speech they deem acceptable - their own ), councillors determined to discuss withdrawal from the EU should encounter no real difficulties. Or debate.

I'm not a Ukipite (though agree with quite a many of their points). I was analysing their results in the recent county council election, and what struck me is that many of the areas where they won were seaside towns, the Fens vegetable belt, new towns, and semi industrial areas. In Norfolk particular they got 15 councillors, especially in the Breckland towns and Great Yarmouth, areas with recent increases in the Eastern European population. A lot of these place tend to be 'working class Tory'. Yarmouth is the poorest town in East Anglia, its sad because it should have a lot of potential with the offshore gas and is actually quite an attractive town with the largest parish church (now Minister, St Nicholas) by area in England which I strongley recommend to our host.

There is a hunger for change - and a deep frustration - with a large swathe of the population. We have to work hard to achieve it, the time has never been better.

Ronnie james
You could argue to a point that the recent success of UKIP could herald a new up and coming party ( even though it has been around for a while). Yet it is being questioned about its alleged racism because of its anti immigration stance.
The media are whipping the 'race issue' even though it is simply anti immigration for practical reasons.
What do we now see....as I predicted some time ago, intimidation by the dark forces of the left. Farage had to be locked in a pub ( I bet he liked that ! ) for his own safety last night due to 'anti racist ' bigots.
This will shortly escalate to UKIP public meetings where the usual far left thugs will turn up to deny freedom of speech yet again.
Exactly what 'freedom of speech' do the far left deem as 'democratic' and acceptable?
The media are responsible for this attack on a democratic party by whipping up the natural in built hatred of the far left.
The foot soldiers of the political class.
We don't see this kind of reporting on the Green party who's founder left due to its infiltration of communists, but then the far left always get an easy ride in the media.

@ ronnie james
Long time no comment. But any support for the BNP usually had you jumping through the multicult hoops in support of the multicult .Just as a Mr Charles
If we can set off from a common spot . Tolerance, one might agree on the whole the British are/were a tolerant peoples. Other might quite rightly argue its that tolerance that got us where we are today. Other societies might have chosen to put a stop to immigration long before it became seen as a problem it is here.
So you solution if it really is meant is the create another tolerant party. Where intolerance should at least be a part of the solution .
By the way we now have a fledgling new party the BDP British Democratic Party. formed from the split within the original BNP. No doubt all Nazis just like the BNP as the MSM and fools like to describe it.
Patriotism being that oh so evil outlook. Well ronnie you and and your ilk. No party is capable in re-uniting this broken land, by copying the tolerance of the others parties ( A false tolerance at that ) for they cannot tolerate dissent of a real nature . Greens are fine UKIP a safety value .One step out of line by way of making a real difference .The will be back treated like the BNP.
My logic is this .If the Mainstream parties and their acolytes don't like it,It must therefore be GOOD.
So I suggest you try to be a little less tolerant of mainstream and forget about a new all singing party that will unite this broken Nation. For it cannot exist in any shape or form .Even if by some miracle it could Time does not allow.

Mr Thomas Moon, in his response to Brent, suggests that " Surely, if more people support and join the BNP, they will influence it to become a better party. Or is it beyond redemption"

Why bother?
If you are starting out to solve the obvious ( seemingly intractable) issues with race, tolerance & general uselessness in a party that is yet to be established in the minds of the mainstream electorate, why base it on such toxic foundations?

Better surely to establish a new party lock, stock & barrel, rather than try to engage an already defunct entity, that comes replete with so much ad hominem ammunition for the opposition.

No organisation should be beyond redemption in a functioning democracy where logic & sound debate win the day; but that would involve thinking about stuff, which is most unpopular.

"‘The result of the next election is already decided - the Left will be in office, either with a Labour majority, or a Lib-Lab pact, or a Lib-Con pact, or a Tory government in thrall to left-wing ideas. No radical change, on the areas which Tory voters care about most, will take place."

The only results that doesn't predict is a Liberal majority government or a Lab-Con coalition- not really sticking your neck out too much I think....

I agree. The depressing statistic, that can please no civilised person, is that 73% of the population are still supporting Labour, the Conservatives and the Lib Dems. Whatever one thinks of the BNP, are they really worse than the old parties? Mr Hitchens rightly criticises the establishment parties, but then gets depressed when people choose to support the alternatives. Surely, if more people support and join the BNP, they will influence it to become a better party. Or is it beyond redemption?

By the way, I think that most of the 700% increase in donations came from one large legacy, so don't read too much into that.

Another classic example of this government being left wing is its pig-headed pursuit of the EU originated HS2 project, and economic incompetence.

Following the damning Cabinet Report which in spite of telling other governments around the world that they should be open, Francis Maude has refused to publish in full, even the Audit Office has today said that the project is £3 Billion short and more significantly it cannot see the benefits of HS2. This is hardly surprising when even attempted justifications on journey times are fraudulent, including most obviously the absurd comparison with the current slow train 84 minutes service rather than the 72 minutes fast train service - which incidentally already matches the German High Speed Cologne to Frankfurt train journey over virtually the same distance.

Given 25% of the recent vote went to UKIP, it is high time UKIP is allocated a panel place and thereby properly represented on the BBC Question Time programme.

I intend to save this article and reproduce it to my friends as I agree with every word. I make no bones about my foolishness (guilt) in believing Mr Cameronin 2010 but I am not fooled now. I regularly blog on the internet (Daily Telegraph) and urge people 'Do NOT vote Tory'. Yesterday 14th May Daniel Hannan said that David Cameron has delivered - NO HE HASN'T and I blogged most of the issues about the wording of the referendum ('Do you think the United Kingdom should REMAIN a member of the European Union?') which is clearly written to obtain an affirmative answer, there is no date, there is nothing to say that the Government will obey a 'No' vote (David Cameron has already told El Pais that he will not obey a No vote). PLEASE do not be fooled like I was and be taken in again. Do NOT vote Tory

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear on this weblog until the moderator has approved them. They must not exceed 500 words. Web links cannot be accepted, and may mean your whole comment is not published.